More on Libbian hypocrisy

Ed Brayton found a much better case--one involving the same crimes, similar sentence and an actual opinion from the Bush administration. Let's watch:

The defendant was Victor Rita, a military veteran who was accused or perjury and obstruction of justice and received a 33 month sentence (Libby received 30 months for the same offense). He asked that the sentence be reduced in light of his long military service. Bush's DOJ filed an amicus brief arguing against giving him a lighter sentence and in favor of upholding the Federal sentencing guidelines.

And when you read that brief you see just how deep the hypocrisy goes. In that brief, the Bush administration argued that the sentencing guidelines must be upheld because failure to do so would result in those accused of the same crime being treated differently. "A system that permits significant disparity in sentences imposed on similarly situated offenders," the administration argued, "fails to 'promote respect for the law' or 'provide just punishment.'" They urged the Court to uphold those guidelines in order to fulfill "the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of similar conduct."

The brief also notes that 33 months for the crime or perjury and obstruction of justice was at "the bottom of the advisory guidelines range." Libby's sentence was 3 months shorter than that. And the defendant in that case could point to a lifetime of military service as a compensating factor; Libby cannot. Yet we still hear from his defenders that his work in the administration amounts to "public service" and should weight against his sentence. This whole thing is hypocritical on so many levels that it almost boggles the mind.